Thesis: Revisionist or Post revisionist faulting United States? ? ? The Cold War ( 1947-1991 ) was a go oning political struggle, military tenseness, economic competition and atomic arm race between the two world powers of the clip, the USA and the USSR. It is a struggle inherited from the Second World War which did non take to a hot war but to many proxy wars, alliances, propaganda and espionage. The Cold War was based in a turning sense of fright and misgiving, keeping the former Alliess to a confrontation that neither could afford but at the same clip that neither could get away.
There are three different theses about the beginnings of the Cold War: the Orthodox, the Revisionist and the Post-revisionist.
The Orthodox American position, as set by the American authorities and as reaffirmed late by most American bookmans, had been that the Cold War was an indispensable response of free work forces to communist aggression. The Orthodox position blames the USSR for the start of the cold war. ( ORIGINS OF THE COLD WAR, by Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. )
The revisionist thesis is really different. They see it in its utmost signifier, that after the terminal of World War II the United Stated intentionally abandoned the wartime policy of coaction and with the ownership of the atomic bomb, set about a class of aggression to throw out Russian influence from Eastern Europe and to set up democracy and capitalist economy everyplace. This aggression from the United States towards Russia left Moscow no option but to take steps of defence. Therefore to hold as a consequence the Cold War. ( ORIGINS OF THE COLD WAR, by Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. )
The station revisionist position blames both the Americans and the Russians. In the thesis itself, there is a deeper split between bookmans in two groups: those who blame the Americans more and those who blame the Russians more. ( International Relations since 1945, by Young and Kent )
In this paper I will critically analyze the beginnings of the Cold War based in the Post-Revisionist position which blames the USA more than the USSR. There are three chief justifications of why the cold war started: Political orientation, National Security and Power. I will split this paper in these three chief thoughts demoing them on chronological footing with different illustrations and I will explicate each of them demoing that in my position the existent beginning of the Cold War was the desire for Power and laterality of the USA in Europe and the whole universe.
The beginnings of the Cold War day of the month since World War I, in 1914 when the viing thoughts of communism and broad democracy came into struggle. Since the October revolution took topographic point in Russia ( 1917 ) followed by the start of the civil war ( 1918 ) , the West became disquieted. President Woodrow Wilson instantly sent military personnels to contend against the Bolsheviks. At first expression this would hold seemed as a complete normal action: Wilson had to direct military personnels to contend against the Bolsheviks otherwise he would non esteem the 14 points he had addressed to the Congress.
Thinking about the 14 points which included peace, freedom, national self-government, free trade and international cooperation one could understand that the action of directing military personnels to contend the Bolsheviks was non merely because of esteeming this points that he had made himself. By analysing it, we can see that if the USA Lashkar-e-Taiba Russia hold the revolution and set up communism, there would non be any free trade and the USA would non be taking the universe any longer. Since that clip we can see that there was land for the start of the Cold War. This intercession from Wilson showed clearly and positive Stalin and many others, even more that the West would make everything to destruct his communist dream.
After the Second World War the confederation between the three leaders of the three world powers, USA, Russia and Britain started to hold jobs. This confederation was created thanks to the aid of a common greater enemy and shortly its terminal would come. The confederation was successful because it had won the war, but it would non be able to last the peace. The historic differences, the political orientations and largely the demand for power were two hard to get the better of.
About three decennaries subsequently these political orientations did non alteration. There were many conferences that took topographic point. One to reference was the Potsdam conference were no understanding was reached. At the conference President Truman asked Stalin to retreat his military personnels from Central and Eastern Europe and to keep free elections in Poland. Stalin answered steadfastly that he was non traveling to make so because this would harm his national security. Poland has ever been the boundary line that the menace for Russia could come from, that is why it is more than justified that Russia has to look after its national security. This did non convert the West. But was Russia to fault for seeking to protect its ain province from a menace? It is true that Russia did non fall in the United Nations, and Hull said that this security could be achieved with a station war peacemaking organisation, but in this instance the UN was an American organisation.
A large ground for the start of the Cold War was the division of Germany. The world powers could non happen an understanding in this instance. By 1946, the United States and Britain were doing every attempt to unite all of Germany under western regulation. The Soviet Union responded by consolidating its clasp on Europe by making satellite provinces in 1946 and 1947. One by one, communist authoritiess, loyal to Moscow, were set up in Poland, Hungary, Romania, and Bulgaria. Stalin used Soviet communism to rule half of Europe. Why Stalin did this might non be clear. Was he seeking to construct an international communist motion get downing in Eastern Europe? Or, was he merely seeking to protect his boundary lines from any intercession on the portion of the United States or the Alliess as with the instance of Poland?
Another cause of the cold war revolved around a comparatively new development in United States-Soviet dealingss. At the beginning of 1946, Truman decided that he was “ tired of babysitting the Soviets who understand merely an Fe fist and strong linguistic communication. ” Stalin responded in February with a address emphasizing the basic mutual exclusiveness between Soviet communism and western democracy, therefore kick offing a new difficult line policy. Frustrated, Washington found significance in a important papers known as the “ Long Telegram. ” In 1946, the Soviet expert George Kennan, sent an 8000 word wire to Washington from Moscow. Kennan was a Foreign Service officer who new Russia good. He understood their history, their civilization and their linguistic communication. Kennan explained the communist outlook in the undermentioned manner. The Soviet ‘s ill will to the West is rooted in the demand to legalize their bloody absolutism — they must therefore believe in the inevitable victory of communism over the beast capitalist economy. The Soviets, Kennan continued, would work every chance to widen their system and hence could non and would non be converted to a policy of harmoniousness and cooperation. ( ORIGINS OF THE COLD WAR, by Arthur Schlesinger, Jr )
While at the same twenty-four hours of the Potsdam conference ( it was the first twenty-four hours of the conference ) in the desert of Mexico a blinding flash was seen. This blinding flash was nil else but the first trial for the atomic bomb, which did get down the atomic age. Was Russia now right to be concerned about their national security? With this act of the ownership of a really unsafe weapon the USA pushed its bounds and set more force per unit area on the Russian doing the dealingss even worst. The USA had no alibis to worry about their national security in footings of district or arms. The universe had to worry about their national security because the USA merely showed them their huge power.
The inquiry that I would wish to raise in this important point is: Did America fought for political orientation or was it for national security? How could the Americans talk about a universe of freedom, peace and international cooperation when they were the 1s who produced a lethal arm which could convey merely war and devastation?
If they fought for national security in the USA, what sort of security was it? The Americans were non threatened in footings of land, nor would anyone travel and occupy them. Why did they claim that their national security was strongly connected with what was go oning in other states in the universe? I strongly believe, and facts show every bit good that national security was merely a mask to conceal behind the purpose of the USA to rule the universe.
Americans did non restrict their intercessions merely in Europe. During the Korean War we could see that the Americans sent their military personnels at that place with the pretest of peace and freedom, but the world was different. They send their military personnels with the lone end which was to support American involvement in the part. They did non restrict themselves to merely back up the South Koreans but they pushed until they reached the Chinese boundary line. They were really near to get down the Third World War.
These actions do non demo a state that promotes peace and freedom, but one that promotes imperialism and laterality of the universe.
When President Truman voiced his accusal at the White House sing ruddy imperialism he said so: “ The United Nations is in Korea because they have to set down an aggression that threatens all human hopes for peace and justness. If the aggression is successful it will distribute in Asia, Europe and America. We are contending in Korea for our ain national security and endurance. ”
As I said above the Americans did non hold a affair of national security. They were non endangered in footings of land and district ; instead they were endangered by an onslaught from the USSR. Maybe Europe and Asia and the remainder of the universe should be more concerned about their national security now that America had in its ownership the atomic bomb.
Possibly what President Truman meant was that if communism wins in Korea ; it would be a menace to his program to rule the universe because he would hold to portion the power with the USSR.
When the Russians developed atomic power, the USA used this against them. People went out in the streets of America protesting against the evil Russian imperium that had atomic arms and was be aftering to destruct the universe. This showed that propaganda was a large arm in the custodies of American politicians. No 1 idea of what Russian people feared when they realized that the Americans had atomic arms. Since this was an arm race and since the Americans turned it into a atomic race I believe that it was more than justified for the Russians to develop their ain atomic arms in the name of security.
During this clip a new phenomenon started in America. As I said before propaganda was really of import. The Americans were scared that communism would get down within the state and its ain people, which is why they used Hollywood histrions to speak against it. The USA propaganda was that America was a topographic point where freedom of address, faith, political positions was respected ; unlike Russia where if people were against communism, they were jailed or killed. It did non look like this was the instance for the Hollywood Ten. The Hollywood Ten was a group of histrions and other celebrated figures of telecasting that refused to speak publically against communism. They all were commanded to imprison because of their beliefs. This clearly is an illustration that shows how these two political orientations were more similar than they appeared to be.
President Truman in one of his addresss said that he was non traveling to stop democracy and he was non traveling to turn FBI in Gestapo to contend communism. He was traveling to guarantee freedom of address, of pick and peace ; promises that he did non maintain, shown in the act of imprisoning the Hollywood 10s and many other communist protagonists.
After the decease of the Soviet Union leader the communist universe was lost. No one knew who would take the state ; therefore a group leading took topographic point. Georgi Malenkov spoke for the party in one of their meetings by saying: “ We stand as we have ever stood, for peaceable coexistence of the two systems. ” This was clearly a strong statement that for the first clip sent a message of peace and cooperation to the USA from the USSR. The inquiry that raises here is if this was merely Soviet propaganda or if the new leaders where different than the old. Even if it was one or the other, this was a minute for peace and cooperation. If this opportunity for peace of all time existed the USA secretary of province John Foster Dulles destroyed it by stating publically: “ We are non dancing on any Russian melody. ” His position was that the declaration of Malenkov was a Russian secret plan to split the western Alliess. Except from demoing paranoia and misgiving and fright, which was normal in a clip of war, this shows besides the little involvement of the Americans for cooperation and peace ; it clearly means that the Americans wanted to acquire rid of the USSR and govern the universe entirely.
At the clip when Nikita Hrushov became the leader of the USSR, dealingss with the USA changed. He was the first leader from the USSR to see the USA. After his visit at that place, he expressed in the Party meeting that relationships with the USA will be friendlier from now on. This would take to a peaceable universe order. In the interim the Americans had been winging spy planes on Soviet air. While the Soviets where holding one of their national parades, where they showed the friendly relationship between the two world powers one of the American undercover agent planes was winging in Soviet air. The plane was shot down by the Soviets and as it crushed, at the same clip the hopes for peace and cooperation between the two powers crushed every bit good. If the Americans would hold accepted the cooperation and friendly dealingss they were building with the USSR and non be avaricious and undercover agent on them the universe would hold been more peaceable. But the Americans position was non to continue their political orientation and national security but to rule the universe.
Because they screwed the relationships with Russia they had to lie both to their people and to the Russians. But Hrushov knew that this was non the truth. In the terminal the American leader had to come to an unfastened field and uncover the truth. This did non assist the authorities expression better in the eyes of the people or of the USSR.
The Vietnam War made it even worst. America helped South Vietnam by back uping it in going a capitalist state. Although Vietnam was non of any importance to the American they feared that if the Vietnamese turned to be communist many other states would make the same. They believed in the Domino rule. The difference of Vietnam from other states was that Vietnam was no communism under Moscow. Its leader Ho Chi Minh was communist itself and he used communism to convey people together in one province. After two decennaries of unsuccessful war the Americans left Vietnam. After Vietnams War people lost trust in the authorities and communism overcame democracy. It was non a good clip for the Americans which decided to utilize the policy of Detente.
When the military personnels came back from Vietnam, President Gerald Ford said as follows: “ These events tragic as they are demoing neither the terminal of the universe nor the terminal of American leading in the universe. ”
With these exact words I believe that it was the first clip that a western leader went out so openly to show the existent purposes of the Americans. From Ford ‘s words we can understand that these purposes were far off from distributing of freedom, peace and national security, but they were about America ‘s leading in of the universe.
The Vietnam War was a really good triumph for the Russians. During the Vietnam Syndrome in the US and with the triumph of the Vietnam War the Russians continued to bring forth more weaponries and to process towards the end of winning the cold war which was one of their biggest errors.
The United States did non step in merely in Vietnam and Korea but in many other topographic points every bit good. Because of the expansionist menace they had from the Soviet Union, in 1949 President Truman and the Congress approved about 400 $ million for proficient development plans in Latin America, Asia and Africa. The end of this plan, as the American claim was to overhaul and beef up developing states and deter the growing of communism. By giving this assistance, as the Marshall Plan they were non taking in assisting these states, but being able to hold them under American control in the hereafter. These are stairss that Americans took towards regulating the universe. While the Americans idea of universalism, the Russians idea of domains of influence and the British idea of a balance of powers. It is clear that the Americans wanted universalism because if non they would hold been cut out of the universe and would non be able to take portion in European political relations and determination pickings. What the Russians wanted was merely to guarantee their national security which was invariably threatened and maintain regulating Easter Europe. ( ORIGINS OF THE COLD WAR, by Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. )
The difference between America and the USSR is, that the USSR did non step in in many states and made them communist ; they helped those states who wanted to go. ( Example: Vietnam ) In contrast America intervened in every state that wanted to turn its government in communism with their free will. This shows that the Americans were non concerned about the will of the people in each state, but they were largely concerned about their power and their place in the universe.
Another illustration of the American intercession in European personal businesss was besides the creative activity of NATO. The thought for something like NATO grew from general European frights of renewed Soviet aggression. Hitler was still on everybody ‘s head. Although Hitler was dead, was Stalin possibly viewed as the following attacker? Regardless of whether or non Stalin was hell-bent on universe domination, the point here is that he was perceived to be an attacker in the Hitler cast. Western Europe besides needed some warrant from the United States that they would be protected from any aggression while they began the slow procedure of economic recovery.
For the United States, NATO signified that the United States could no longer remain stray from European personal businesss. Indeed, NATO meant that European personal businesss were now American personal businesss every bit good. But Stalin was non Hitler. Furthermore, the Soviets were non Nazis. And in the terminal there was really small grounds of a Soviet secret plan to occupy Western Europe. All NATO truly did was escalate Soviets frights of the West and to bring forth even higher degrees of international tenseness.
In decision, based on the post-revisionist position with a higher incrimination on America I have to state that the lone beginning of the cold war was the end of the USA to regulate the universe ; an end that we can see reached in today ‘s universe.